san jose, a city to recover_ec

Transcription

San Jose, a city to recover
Professors
Master’s thesis: Elena Cogato Lanza
Master’s project: Monique Ruzicka-Rossier
Maitre: Deborah Piccolo
Expert
Manuel Dengo Benavides
Student
Esteban Coto Chavarria
EPFL 2012-2013
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................4
1_THE CITY OF SAN JOSE..................................................................................................................5
_City facts.............................................................................................................................5
_Location..............................................................................................................................5
_Description......................................................................................................................... 7
_Demographics.....................................................................................................................8
2_THE URBAN GRID PLAN IN THE AMERICAS...................................................................................11
_Laws of the Indies...............................................................................................................11
_Urban grid plans................................................................................................................. 13
_Spaniard grid plans.................................................................................................13
_Grid plans in Costa Rica.......................................................................................... 15
_Manhattan’s grid plan: comparison........................................................................16
3_SAN JOSE’S GRID PLAN.................................................................................................................18
_The foundation of a town...................................................................................................18
_The new center...................................................................................................................20
_The establishment of the grid plan.....................................................................................21
4_DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.........................................................................................................27
_Infrastructure......................................................................................................................27
_New suburbs and social segregation...................................................................................28
_Architectural languages......................................................................................................31
_Housing...............................................................................................................................33
_The “urbanización”..............................................................................................................36
1|
5_MOBILITY...................................................................................................................................... 37
_Automobile mobility...........................................................................................................37
_Public transportation..........................................................................................................39
_Local transit bus......................................................................................................39
_National and regional bus system...........................................................................43
_Rail transport..........................................................................................................44
_The tramway...........................................................................................................46
_Pedestrian mobility.............................................................................................................48
_Sidewalks................................................................................................................48
_Pedestrian boulevards............................................................................................49
6_URBAN SPACE............................................................................................................................... 51
_Streets and avenues............................................................................................................51
_Block typologies..................................................................................................................54
_Public space........................................................................................................................57
_Residual space.................................................................................................................... 58
_Abandoned space...................................................................................................58
_Deteriorated buildings............................................................................................58
_Parking space..........................................................................................................59
_Site surveys.........................................................................................................................62
_Coca Cola................................................................................................................ 63
_Central Market........................................................................................................64
_National Theater......................................................................................................65
_Atlantic....................................................................................................................66
_Pacific......................................................................................................................67
_Gonzalez Viquez......................................................................................................68
|2
7_URBAN REGENERATION................................................................................................................69
_“San José Posible” plan.......................................................................................................69
_Municipality’s position on regeneration and repopulation................................................69
_Contemporary housing projects in the central core...........................................................71
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................73
BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................................74
3|
INTRODUCTION
For the past half-century Costa Rica’s Greater Metropolitan Area has suffered an unhealthy consumption
of space, expanding from San Jose’s central core into the rural outskirts. As the agglomeration stretches,
distances tend to increase and consequently impact mobility habits. While more people struggle to enter
the city center on a daily basis, the population keeps on moving further away from the core. The concern
therefore is to bring people back to the city and allow them to live and work in it. Indeed, housing has
been losing ground in San Jose’s center, which sets a series of questions on how to live in it nowadays. Is it
possible to live here? Is there space for a mix of activities? And why should people move back to this area?
Topics such as mobility and urban space are fundamental for the city’s functioning. In this case, inefficient
and saturated public transportation, as well as congested streets affect connectivity, while an existing railroad system is underused. Furthermore, the way public and private space is used influences the existence
of certain activities. Although San Jose attracts many people for professional, administrative, cultural and
touristic reasons, it is not a place where they come to live. Perhaps the current spatial urban configuration
does not encourage housing nowadays, although two major projects have recently intended to prove that
it is possible to live within the city center.
The characteristic grid plan will be used as the structural guideline in the study. In order to understand
the current situation, some historical background will be observed, such as the development of the city
throughout the 18th and 19th centuries. Furthermore, there will be an important focus on mobility as well
as different types of urban space. Some morphological observations will intend to point out the strengths
and weaknesses of these topics, such as the city’s dynamism and the existing infrastructure on one hand
and the lack of logic in transportation and the deterioration of space on the other. Six strategic sites will
additionally be analyzed as potential areas that could trigger development in neighboring blocks. Regeneration plans and some of the outcome will also be mentioned in order to visualize how the subject is
being dealt by the city. Finally, one of the goals of the study is to understand some of these contemporary
issues in order to question how to reshape San Jose’s center.
|4
1. THE CITY OF SAN JOSE
City facts1
Area: 44.62 km2
Approximate altitude: 1’100 m above sea level
Population: 309’672
Density: 6’940 inhab/km2
Total households: 17’072*
Used households: 15’543*
Non-used households: 1’529*
Average temperature: 22 (°C)
*Data applies only to central core
Location
San Jose is Costa Rica’s capital city, a nation located on the Central American isthmus, between Nicaragua
and Panama. The city sits in a strategic position at the heart of the Greater Metropolitan Area (GMA) in
Costa Rica’s Central Valley. Together with other major cities such as Alajuela, Cartago and Heredia, the
GMA consists of an urban conglomeration, which covers 57% of the country’s population but only consists
of 4% of the national territory according to the census of 20002.
5|
1. Municipalidad de San José: www.msj.go.cr. Note: the information concerns the Canton of San Jose only, including all its districts. Neighboring municipalities such as TIbas, Goicochea, Montes de Oca, Desamparados, Alajuelita or Excazu are excluded from this data.
2. Eduardo Brenes. La GAM: tendencias y propuestas, algunos datos y ubicación de la GAM. 2002, p. 2.
Fig. 1
Location in America
Fig. 3
Greater Metropolitan Area
Fig. 2
Costa Rica and Greater Metropolitan Area
Fig. 4
Canton of San Jose
| 6 Description
The municipality of San Jose consists of a canton among a total of 81 in Costa Rica and is subdivided into
11 districts and several neighborhoods (fig.4). The 4 districts of Carmen, Catedral, Hospital and Merced
form what we will refer to as the center or the central core of the city and will be the area of interest in
this work. The overall population in the canton is 309’672, however 47’889 inhabitants live in the central
core. The canton’s total area is 44,62 km2 whereas the core consists of 9.47 km2.
As for the city’s structure, the 4 districts are based on the colonial Spaniard urban grid plan and contain
a system of blocks. As mentioned previously, the urban conglomeration extends beyond the city limits
and forms the Greater Metropolitan Area (GMA), which lies in the Central Valley and is surrounded by
mountain chains on the north and south. The population of the urbanized metropolitan area reaches approximately 2 million inhabitants and extends 50 km from east to west and 20 km from north to south.
Although San Jose plays an essential role as the main centrality in the nation’s most populated area, many
other important cities make up the GMA as well, such as Alajuela, Heredia and Cartago.
The location within the valley gives the city heterogeneous terrain morphology, with flat and hilly areas,
as well as 4 major rivers flowing from east to west, two of which mark the core’s northern and southern
limits. The approximate height is 1’100 m above sea level, which gives the city a tempered climate with an
average year-round temperature of 22 (°C) considering its tropical context.
7|
Demographics
According to municipal statistics, the population in the city core is decreasing by a rate of –2.64%. Although
these figures correspond to the 2000 census, the negative growth of population is evident in all 4 districts
and the descending curve can be clearly observed since 1973, when the population summed 91’659 inhabitants3, then falling to 69’976 in 1984 and finally 47’889 in 2000. Furthermore, the district of Carmen,
which is predominately a residential area, has been suffering the most important rate loss at –4.54% and
currently contains half the population it had one hundred years ago. The following information allows us
to compare the population between 1905 and 2000 for each district and the overall population during the
last quarter of the 20th century.
3. Eduardo Brenes. Informe de la comisión de regeneración urbana y repoblamiento de San José, 2004, p. 7.
|8
Districts in the central core:
9|
Carmen:
1.49km2
4’670 inhab (1905)
2’245 inhab (2000)
density : 1’506,71 inhab/km2
population growth : -4.54%
Merced:
2.29km2
5’660 inhab (1905)
12’098 inhab (2000) density : 5’282,97 inhab/km2
Hospital:
3.38km2
8’183 inhab (1905)
21’568 inhab (2000) density : 6’381,07 inhab/km2
Catedral:
2.31km2
5’715 inhab (1905)
11’978 inhab (2000) density : 5’185,28 inhab/km2 population growth : -2.79%
TOTAL :
2
9.47km 24’228 inhab (1905)4 91’659 inhab (1973)
69’976 inhab (1984)
47’889 inhab (2000)5 density : 5’056,9 inhab/km2
4. Cleto Gonzalez Viquez. Apuntes estadísticos sobre la ciudad de San Jose, San Jose, Imprenta de Avelino Alsina, 1905, p. 4.
5. Municipalidad de San Jose: www.msj.go.cr
In order to get a visual idea of San Jose’s current population density, we can narrow it down to a square
kilometer frame, which is equivalent to 121 blocks (fig.5). Taking into account that this frame contains
the estimated city density of 5’057 inhabitants, the approximate population per block would be 42 inhabitants.
Fig. 5
Density on a square kilometer
| 10
2. THE URBAN GRID PLAN IN THE AMERICAS
Laws of the Indies
The grid plan in the Americas was established by the European colonies and became a regulated urban
form of planning cities in the New World. During the first decades of the 16th century, there were a number
of instructions dictated by Charles V in order to lay down the bases for new towns. According to John W.
Reps’ book on the subject, such instructions included choosing “healthy and non-swampy sites, good for
unloading goods, on a river if located inland, with good water and air, and as close to arable land as possible”. Furthermore these instructions state that “the way of setting up the solares – plots – will determine
the pattern of the town, both in the position of the plaza and the church and the pattern of the streets,
for towns newly founded may be established according to plan without difficulty and if not started with
form, they will never attain it”6.
Later during the colony, the Spanish Crown established the Laws of the Indies, Leyes de Indias in Spanish,
a body of laws issued under Philip II in 1573 in view of controlling and setting regulations in the colonies.
Among many topics, part of these laws focus on prescribing the ways in which settlements and towns
must be planned. The regulations are the first urban development legislation to be issued and will allow
an easy planning and construction of the New World7. Many of the planning codes were already in use
before the official Laws were dictated, however this represented a standardization of the rules that had
been followed earlier. The regulations for town planning requested selecting a suitable site, surrounded
by good farming land and with good water supply. The regulations stated: “the plan of the place, with its
squares, streets and building lots is to be outlined by means of measuring by cord and ruler, beginning
with the main square from which streets are to run to the gates and principal roads and leaving sufficient
open space so that even if the town grows it can always spread in a symmetrical manner”8.
11 |
6. John W. Reps. The making of Urban America: A History of City Planning in the United States. Princeton, Prinston University Press, 1992, p. 28.
7. José Ramón Alonso Pereira. Introducción a la historia de la arquitectura: de los orígenes al siglo XXI. Barcelona, Editorial Reverté, 2005, p.135.
8. Cited by John W. Reps. Royal. “Op. cit.”. In: Ordinances Concerning the Laying Out of New Towns, Zeila Nuttal, The American Historical Review, v, 1922, 24954, p. 29.
The main units of measurement used during colonial times for foundation of towns were the vara for
length and the manzana for area. The vara, which means rod and is similar to the yard, had different variations throughout Spain, nevertheless almost always reaching approximately 83-84 cm. In Costa Rica one
vara9 attained 0.8393 m and even though the unit is currently no longer in use, except for cutting wood,
people may still use the term while giving directions, 100 varas being the length of a block. Moreover, the
notion of manzana10, which means apple, is used in much of the Spanish-speaking world to express a city
block. As a unit of measurement, the manzana is equivalent to 10’000 var2 or 7’056 m2. The original blocks
in Costa Rican cities match these numbers and according to a neighborhood proposal plan expressed in
meters for San Jose’s northeast area11, we can see that the blocks are dimensioned at 84 m, which equals
100 varas (fig.6).
Fig. 6
Plan for Escalante
source: Arquitectura
Urbana en Costa Rica,
Carlos Altezor, p. 29.
9. François Cardarelli. Encyclopedia of Scientific Units, Weights and Measures: Their SI Equivalences and Origins. Rochdale, England, Springer, 2003, p. 155.
10. Ibid.
11. Carlos Altezor Fuentes. Arquitectura urbana en Costa Rica: exploración histórica 1900-1950. Cartago, Editorial Tecnológica de Costa Rica, 1986, p. 29.
| 12
Urban grid plans
Spaniard grid plans
During the first journeys to the New World in the end of the 15th century, the Spanish Crown began laying out settlements among which La Isabela, built in 1493 on Hispaniola, was the first. However, it wasn’t
until 1502, when Santo Domingo was reconstructed that it became the first city in the New World to be
structured with the European grid-plan12 (fig. 7). It interestingly does not contain the geometric rigidity of
newer checkerboard plans, as the streets do not all run parallel to each other and the main plaza is not a
central square. According to some theories, the reason for this may simply lie in the influence of cities with
military character like Santa Fe de Granada, one of the few grid cities in Spain13.
Later in 1519, before the Laws of the Indies were even enacted, Panama City was established as Nuestra
Señora de la Asunción de Panamá (Our Lady of the Assumption of Panama), thus becoming the first Spaniard city to be founded on the Pacific coast and on the continent’s narrowest stretch14. In a similar way to
Santo Domingo’s plan, the grid wasn’t laid out with strict rigidity. After Henry Morgan destroyed the original coastal settlement in 1668, the city was relocated to its current place on the strategic peninsula of San
Felipe (fig. 8). In the case of Panama City, its second and current checkerboard plan, known as the Casco
Antiguo (Ancient Core), doesn’t play a central role in the modern city like it does in San Jose.
As for Guatemala City, another establishment in the region, it is an example of a town founded inland like
San Jose, however developed with military purposes in an attempt to overrun Central America from the
north. In total the city has had three locations. The first was Santiago de los Caballeros in 1527 and chosen
by Pedro de Alvarado, first governor of Central America.
13 |
12. David Gaimster and Teresita Majewski. International Handbook of Historical Archeology, New York, Springer, 2009, pp. 434-435.
13. Colin Chant & David C. Goodman. Pre-Industrial: Cities and Technology. London, Routledge, 1999, p.255.
14. David Marley. Historic Cities of the Americas: An illustrated Encyclopedia, Volume 1. Santa Barbara, ABC-CLIO, 2005, pp. 347-358.
Some years later, in 1541 several natural disasters destroyed the town and a new site was found to reestablish it a few miles away. The second town, currently known as the colonial city of Antigua Guatemala,
was founded in 1543 and became the Captaincy-General, which ruled all the Central American provinces,
including Costa Rica. Nevertheless more natural disasters drew the city to its third and current location in
1774, nearly around the same period of San Jose’s foundation. The new city, located 25 km from its previous site and now called Nueva Guatemala de la Asunción, was founded with a planned urban structure
(fig. 9), unlike San Jose’s spontaneous growth.
Fig. 7
Santo Domingo
Fig. 8
Panama
Fig. 9
Guatemala
| 14
Grid plans in Costa Rica
Towns in Costa Rica are in general characterized by their checkerboard plan and despite their size they all present a common element in their urban typology: the central park and the church as
the core on two adjacent blocks. Although most towns were founded later during the colony, except Cartago and Esparza, some plans
are more rigid than others. In some cases the broken topography
prevents the possibility of developing a stiff geometrical pattern,
in others it is simply the fact that most towns did not undergo a
strict planning process. One could wonder if San Jose’s geometrical imprecision is a result of spontaneous urban growth or if the
uneven terrain gave it its shape. Nevertheless many cities like Cartago and Alajuela contrast with San Jose’s irregular grid plan and
interestingly present rather symmetrical systems. First the actual
city of Cartago, which served as Costa Rica’s capital until 1823,
was designed two centuries before San Jose15. It is interesting to
notice that while Cartago was originally a planned city but never
reached a primary status in Latin America, San Jose’s process went
the opposite way, beginning as a small hermitage and growing into
a major metropolis. Alajuela on the other hand shares a similar history with San Jose, being a newer city founded towards the end of
the 18th century16 but amazingly with a much more regular plan. In
both cases the geometrical precision in the city plans is evident (all
blocks are the same size), although the systems were discontinued
in their urban expansion during the 20th century.
15 |
15. Ofelia Sanou, et al. Costa Rica: An Architectural and Landscape guide. San Jose and Sevilla, Junta
de Andalucía, 2010, p.87.
16. Ibid., p. 91.
Fig. 10
Cartago
source: Google Earth
Fig. 11
Alajuela
source: Google Earth
Manhattan’s grid plan: comparison
Though not a Latin American case, the goal of comparing New York City’s plan with San Jose’s aims at
setting the city side by side with one of the world’s most famous contemporary grid plans. Manhattan is
indeed only one example among others, however it is often used as a reference, therefore the intention of
including it into the study. If only both grid plans are taken into account, it is intriguing to observe more differences between the cities than similarities. The first obvious distinction is clearly the size, Manhattan being approximately six times larger than San Jose. Furthermore, while San Jose’s growth was spontaneous
in time and New York’s grid entirely thought out in 180717 (fig. 12), the first city’s current core marks the
departure point of the system while Manhattan’s original core in the south of the peninsula, which is fairly
irregular, is not integrated into the big design. New York also shows many differences regarding its original
environment. It is a peninsula at sea level and the topography is almost entirely flat in comparison with
San Jose’s. Concerning the blocks, the Big Apple is not divided into squares but rather rectangles of 90x300
m and 90x150 m. As to the grid system in general, Manhattan’s plan is very rigid and contains a hierarchy
between its avenues and streets, as well as wider arteries than San Jose. Finally the area of Central Park,
emerging amidst the city’s structure as an extremely rigorous negative space, is unique to New York’s plan.
As for similarities, both cities experienced major growth during the 19th century, which makes them relatively new compared to other developed colonial settlements in the New World. In both cases the pattern plays a central role for a larger urban agglomeration. Furthermore the orientation of the structure
of streets and avenues follows natural lines. In New York avenues are parallel to the Hudson and the East
River, while streets are perpendicular. In San Jose avenues are parallel to the Torres and Maria Aguilar rivers, thus streets being perpendicular.
17. Rem Koolhaas. New York Délire (Delirious New York). Marseille, Editions Parenthèses, 2002, pp. 18-19.
| 16
17 |
Fig. 12
Manhattan’s Commissioners plan of 1811
source: gvshp.org
3. SAN JOSE’S GRID PLAN
The foundation of a town
San Jose began as a humble hermitage in 1737, known as Boca del Monte, but its real consistent development took place only after the second half of the 18th century. In 1823 it was declared capital of Costa Rica,
replacing Cartago, the ancient colonial city. According to historian Florencia Quesada, “San Jose is one of
the few cases in Latin American urban history of a secondary village founded during the 18th century that
became a primate city during the 19th century”18.
Humble origins were common for towns throughout Spanish colonies in America, as most settlements did
not emerge from a founding act, did not have a distribution of plots or common land, nor even an initial
outline. They were rather part of a spontaneous and slow process of growth, generated by a central nucleus that later adopted the grid plan in their urban organization. So unlike primary cities founded under
meticulous planning, San Jose began as a small rural church.
But the growing population in the region was not the only reason for founding new towns. Quesada’s research19 explains that many villas – towns – were founded throughout the province of Costa Rica by order
of the religious power in order to establish control over populations living far from main urban nucleuses.
The long distance and difficulty to travel from Boca del Monte to Cartago meant many Spaniards fulfilled
their religious duties in the nearest indigenous towns. Religious authorities in Cartago did not approve of
these procedures so the Spaniard inhabitants in the western part of the Central Valley solicited the construction of their own church. After many attempts to establish congregations in this area, it was ordered
that a church be built at the Boca del Monte. This decision intended to gather the scattered inhabitants
in the area and allow them to fulfill their religious duties. The first hermitage, completed in 1738, was
erected near a strategic crossroad on a plain located between the Torres and Maria Aguilar rivers (fig. 13).
18. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. Planning Latin America’s capital cities, 1850-1950. London, Routledge, 2002, p.242
19. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. La Modernización entre cafetales: San José, Costa Rica, 1880-1930. Doctoral thesis. Helsinki, Renvall Institute, 2007, p. 20
| 18
But by the mid 18th century the urban footprint of what
is now known as San Jose did not even have the features
and yet less the structure of a small settlement. Quesada’s historic research on the matter tells us that, Bishop
Morel de Santa Cruz, who visited the province of Costa
Rica in 1751, observed that “the town was composed
of eleven houses of tile, fifteen of straw, no plaza nor
road, lacking water and a narrow, humble and indecent
church”20. In addition to this, the bishop describes there
being “no urban structure, but rather a settlement composed by a few scattered houses throughout the valley,
which was not organized in an urban quadrant because
it didn’t exist and was not outlined”21. Through these
historic observations, it is clear that by this time San
Jose lacked the fundamental element that structured a
colonial town or a city, the central plaza, which is the
structural axis of a checkerboard plan.
Moreover, Quesada’s work also explains how the mayor
of Cartago gave the order in 1755 that the people come
back and “settle beneath the church’s bell”22 after the
inhabitants of Boca del Monte had left the town and
once again scattered throughout the valley. The wealthiest inhabitants were ordered to settle back immediately while the poorest, who had no land or cattle, were
given more time to do so.
19 |
20. Ibid., p. 22.
21. Ibid., p. 23.
22. Ibid.
Fig. 13
Original crossroad in Boca del Monte (San Jose)
They were however obligated to inform the sooner the
possible where they would choose to live in order to
have a plot assigned to them. Despite the instructions
given by the church and Cartago, these measures did
not reach their goal, since similar orders continued being issued until 1777 to force people to congregate and
rebuild their homes in town.
The new center
Fig. 14
Original and current centers
In 1767 San Jose became a parish and in 1781, under
Father Chapui, a new church of adobe was completed
two blocks south of the original hermitage. This new
parish generated the creation of a new plaza on the
western side of the church, which marked a new central
open space for the town, as Spaniard urban principals
dictated. This step clearly defined an explicit new center for the city, and even though this wasn’t the original
core, it quickly became the center of religious power,
which would later set the grounds for the development
of the grid. The site is nowadays known as the Metropolitan Cathedral of San Jose and the plaza – currently
known as the Central Park – still marks the city center,
even though it is no longer the only open space with its
characteristics (fig. 14).
| 20
The establishment of the grid plan
It is not exactly clear when and how the plan was established, however the creation of the central plaza
may have probably been the trigger to San Jose’s grid. It is also possible that there may have never been
an official order to create the quadrant before the construction of the new church. According to Quesada’s
investigations23 there is no known date that mentions the creation of the checkerboard plan, its formation
may have simply been the fruit of a long and spontaneous process, as the city grew in a non-preconceived
manner. However, Bourbon Reforms at that time may have also brought some of the greatest contributions to the city’s growth and development. Part of their goal was to control the population and promote
development in the cities. In the meantime, despite people’s resistance, a decree from 1777 once again
forced families “who had moved to the countryside to go back to the towns where they belonged”24.
Yet Bourbon Reforms also implemented the Tobacco factory in San Jose in 1782, which was a major source
of contribution to the city’s growth. The province of Costa Rica had been granted the monopoly of tobacco
production within the Kingdom of Guatemala at the end of the 18th century, which generated much wealth
to the city. By 1815 the product was only cultivated within San Jose’s municipal grounds.
Another important contribution that may have influenced San Jose’s development is the donation of a
great amount of land bequeathed by Father Chapui in 1783 after his death. The condition given in Chapui’s
will stated, “all who want a plot of land come live beneath the (church) bell”25. Thus Chapui’s legacy may
have stimulated the city’s shaping by making land accessible to people.
21 |
23. Ibid., p. 25
24. Ibid., p. 26
25. Ibid., p. 28
Furthermore, Quesada’s research informs of San Jose’s first city plan, entrusted to Manuel Torres Romero
in 1793, which outlined several blocks. According to all existing sources it is the first reference that mentions a plan for Villa Nueva, San Jose’s name at the time. The description mentions that “the plots were
distributed”26 and the city limits were defined.
By 1813 San Jose was granted city status and its population summed up 12’000 souls. Although the 19th
century was a dynamic period for San Jose’s development, the grid did not drastically expand until the first
half of the 20th century. By 1889 the city’s plan, with 153 blocks, was relatively regular and all urban arteries were contained within the geometrical shape of the grid. Many of the peripheral rural roads, which led
to nearby towns and were not laid out according to the logic of the grid system, became part of the urban
pattern as the structure of the city began to expand. However the integration of this rural trace did not
break the continuity of the original grid system and blocks continued to add on to the city until the middle of the 20th century. The first suburbs flourished between 1889 and 1905 on the northeast, the south
and the west. It is interesting to see in 1905 one example of a new neighborhood on the extreme west
which developed from outside the pattern inwards (visible in 1924). Newer blocks also have the peculiar
feature of being rigid squares compared to the more polygonal shapes of the original ones. By 1924 new
grid plans developed on the northwest and northeast, detached from the original system in part because
of the broken topography.
Finally, through these observations it is first interesting to point out the importance of the church in the
process of creating the city. In this case, the establishment of the hermitage in a specific place for locals
to fulfill their religious duties is the starting point for what will become a capital city. Secondly the reason
for the city’s creation began by forcing people from the valley to gather near an official religious center.
Although the intentions at the time were based on religious reasons, the idea of bringing people to the city
is once again relevant for San Jose.
26. Ibid., p. 30
| 22
Fig. 15
Plan of 1889
23 |
Fig. 16
Plan of 1905
| 24
Fig. 17
Plan of 1924
25 |
Fig. 18
Plan of 1948
| 26
4. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY
Infrastructure
After Costa Rica gained its independence in 1821, San Jose quickly became a dominant center and an
engine for new activities27. The cultivation and exportation of coffee during most of the 19th century propelled the city forward and by the 1890s the city had been consolidated as the center of politics, culture,
commerce, services and communications in the country28. The measures proposed by the Liberals, who
took political power in the 1870s, influenced much of the changes. These elites, who considered European
theories and practices as the path to development and progress, promoted most works of infrastructure.
Some of the achievements included the railroad in 1890, which facilitated exports to European markets
through the Atlantic coast. The Atlantic train station was built on the northeastern side of the city and
became the epicenter of urban renewal with a boulevard connecting it to the center29.
Nevertheless the creation of public services truly led the city into a modern stage, transforming it from a
rural town, dedicated to growing tobacco and coffee, into a small city with an urban culture. Among new
services there was the construction of a water pipe network in 1867, a new sewer system, a telegraph in
1869 and public telephones in 1886. By 1884 the first power plant had been constructed on the Torres
River by Manuel V. Dengo and Luis Batres. This would allow electric public lighting that same year, replacing oil lamps and making San Jose the first city in Latin America to use this system. The construction of a
new power station later in 1890 would allow lighting for private homes and the soon to come tramway,
which opened in 1899 in order to connect the railroad station with the center. As for public health, San
Jose had its hospital since 1852, which marked the starting point for other health services.
27 |
27. Carlos Altezor Fuentes. Op. cit., p. 15.
28. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. En el Barrio Amon. San Jose, Universidad de Costa Rica, 2004, p. 49.
29. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. Planning Latin America’s capital cities... Op. cit., p.245.
After the second half of the 20th century the city expanded drastically but the pace of infrastructure development slowed down. These historical achievements allow us to understand a city with a dynamic past
regarding public services. Most of them are still very well covered nowadays, like water and electricity
supply, however mobility has been and is currently a major problem. Most works of infrastructure nowadays are related to maintenance and little has been implemented in the past decades. Some of the most
important recent interventions are the installation of a new public lighting system and the underground
electrification of most of the central core, which radically has cleared the street landscape from electric
posts and cable lines. But the overall lack of infrastructure investment may result in a negative impact on
the attractiveness of the city, a condition that must be fulfilled in order to bring people back.
New suburbs and social segregation
One of the outcomes of San Jose’s banana, coffee and sugar cane production during the 19th century was
the expansion of the city through the development of residential neighborhoods in the outskirts. The
economic activity, which stimulated rapid growth, resulted in different social classes identifying to specific
areas in town. Florencia Quesada uses the term “suburb” when she refers to the new neighborhoods located “away from the traditional locus near the main plaza”30 where the elites move into. Although these
new parts of the city join into the continuity of the same grid, a new social fracture takes place within the
system. The first exclusive suburb was Barrio Amon, named after Amon Fasileau-Duplantier, landowner
and head of the expansion project. Located in the upper northeast side of San Jose, the neighborhood was
developed near the Atlantic train station, a project also linked to the dynamic productivity of the time.
Many of its physical features contrasted with the old urban grid. For instance new streets were now wider
than the ones in the original core, as the new Ley de ensanches – law of expansions – established them at
20 m instead of the original 13 m31.
30. Ibid., p.261.
31. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. La Modernización entre cafetales... Op. cit., p. 86.
| 28
During the following decades the new wealthy neighborhoods of Otoya, Aranjuez and Escalante blossomed east of Amon, which created a highly concentrated high-class area in San Jose with new architectural languages. Later, during the first years of the 20th century the tram would allow easy access to the
suburbs, promoting the creation of new outlying neighborhoods32.
However, expansion is not an exclusive phenomenon experienced by the richer social classes. Although
segregation began through the bourgeoisie’s flourishing suburbs, lower-class neighborhoods also appeared in the northwest (Barrio Mexico), the south (Carit) and the southeast of the city (Turrujal). In 1900
a working-class neighborhood was planned through private initiative in the southern area and accompanied by the construction of a textile plant, a sawmill and other small factories33. Later in the 1920s more
popular neighborhoods consolidated the south of San Jose as the lower-class area, a characteristic that
still endures today. The contrast between the south and the suburban wealthy northeast were not only
distinguishable among different architectural features but through the little amount of infrastructure and
state development in the southern part, leading to evident differences in living conditions between both
extremities34.
Nowadays the issue of expansion has been translated into urban sprawl, which has allowed the extension
of social segregation. As a matter of fact, residential suburbs continue to develop farther from San Jose’s
central core and geographical distances have gained more importance. San Jose may have conserved its
central role in the urban agglomeration, but the issues of urban growth, with low-density neighborhoods
more and more distant from it, have triggered many problems like accessibility and insecurity. The first
problem – accessibility – is a common issue in many cities. As mentioned previously, the tramway in the
beginning of the 20th century set the conditions for new suburbs to develop away from the core. But today
it is more difficult to access the city center as longer distances can only be reached by car or by an obsolete
public transportation network.
29 |
32. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. Planning... Op. cit., p.246.
33. Ibid., p.262.
34. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. En el Barrio... Op. cit., p. 70.
Fig. 19
First suburbs
| 30
As for safety, many neighborhoods have taken an additional step in their segregation by fencing themselves as gated-communities. This is not exclusive to the high-class, as more and more middle-class neighborhoods decide to install “checkpoints” at their entrances even if the streets are public. The issue of
segregation is no longer only linked to the separation of social classes but communities now physically cut
themselves into private societies as an answer to insecurity.
Architectural languages
The development of the city generated suburbs, social segregation, new infrastructure, but also codes in
the architectural paradigm. After the independence of Costa Rica, San Jose was still predominantly rural
but the evolution of the town quickly brought many changes. The Liberal party established the neoclassical language for government and religious buildings towards the end of the 19th century. At this time
European urban culture began to influence a small city with one-story houses made of adobe and tiles.
Among many buildings, the National Theater inaugurated in 1897 is perhaps the most appealing example
of Neoclassicism in the country (fig. 20). But public buildings were not the only ones to show signs of this
European influence, as private homes and shops also adopted elements of the classical language. Barrio
Amon, which was developed around the same time, became one of the dominant areas for this language
in private buildings.
Even though Neoclassicism lasted until the middle of the 20th century an anti-academic reaction developed against it between 1900 and 1930. Three new architectural tendencies clearly appeared in the Latin
American panorama in this period: Modernism, Art Deco and Neocolonialism35. The first two were influenced by Europe’s shift away from Neoclassicism whereas the third emerged from local cultural concerns
of establishing a Latin American language. But the adoption of new architectural languages in Costa Rica
did not only bring new typologies and esthetics, they contributed in the construction field, as new building
methods were introduced, leaving behind the colonial adobe walls and tile roofs.
31 |
35. Carlos Altezor Fuentes. Op. cit., pp. 74-75.
Nowadays there seems to be a historical attachment to many so-called “old buildings”. While many of
them were demolished or kept abandoned until the 1990s, people seem to be reminiscent of what they
refer to as the “San Jose of our grandparents”. Although many consider San Jose in the beginning of the
20th century more prestigious in comparison with the city today, no one can really confirm this idealistic
thought of a greater past, as it largely based on historical illustrations. In the past years several buildings
have undergone renovation in view of valuing the architectural legacy, especially in San Jose’s core, which
is one of the only places in the country where these different languages and tendencies coexist.
Fig. 20
National Theater
source: costaricablognumberone.blogspot.com
Fig. 21
Pacific railway station
source: panoramio.com by Gino Vivi
Fig. 22
Atlantic railway station
source: http://johnsmitchell.photoshelter.com by John Mitchell
| 32
Housing
During the colonial era houses were very homogenous, built of adobe and tile and usually not higher
than one story. As new building techniques and technologies began to appear, typologies adapted to their
times. Until approximately the 1960s it was still normal for all social classes to live in the central core.
Housing was part of the functions in the city unlike today, where most people live outside San Jose’s grid
plan.
The characteristic with houses built before 1890 was the narrow plots in which they were inserted and
the contiguity of the buildings, which extended from wall to wall. The facades in the central core usually
coincided with the limit between the property and the street. After neighborhoods like Amon began to
flourish during the end of the 19th century, new typologies were introduced into the city. One of the most
perceivable ruptures with traditional dense housing was the construction of villas with front yards and iron
fences in the new suburban context36. Built space in blocks was not entirely consumed like in the traditional and compact nucleus. Some houses even detached from one another and in the first quarter of the
20th century new elements were introduced into housing programs, for instance garages. The example in
Paul Ehrenberg’s plan from 1933 shows a house in Otoya with a garage, as well as its four sides freed from
contiguous constructions (fig. 23 & 24).
Working-class housing in the south maintains many aspects of traditional typologies, for instance the contiguity with other buildings and the closeness of the front door to the sidewalk. During the third decade
of the 20th century a housing crisis hit the city. Property speculation and critical poor housing conditions
drove a low-density development based on plots and houses provided as partial solutions by the municipality and the private sector37.
33 |
As for apartment buildings, they are rather limited in the central core and few multi-story residential or
semi-residential buildings were constructed until the end of the 20th century. Architect Jose-Francisco Salazar did however intervene in 1943 in the densely constructed heart of San Jose with a four-story building
composed of a commercial ground floor and three levels of apartments (fig. 25 & 26). The irregular perimeter of the plan indicates the shape of an original plot, which Salazar consumed entirely. It is an urban
typology, with two apartments per level. According to the information on the plan, Salazar took elements
from the traditional Costa Rican housing typology, such as washing rooms – pilas – and the patios – aire
y luz –. Because of the narrow plot, only one apartment is oriented on the main facade, while the other
captures natural light through inner patios. This type of housing solution is rather rare in San Jose and
given the year of construction – 1943 –, it seems Salazar may have tried to experiment an urban typology
in the heart of the city.
But since people have been moving out of San Jose’s central core, housing has become an abandoned
function. It is intriguing to wonder what has made people chose to leave the central districts of San Jose
for the outskirts. Is it cultural? Does the contemporary mentality separate intimate and public activities in
different geographical locations? Or does San Jose’s bad image affect people’s opinion of living in or near
the center?
In any case, future housing in the city may have to adapt to contemporary conditions in a dynamic city and
provide urban typologies amidst commercial, cultural and other activities. Indeed, living in San Jose will
perhaps mean mixing daily activities and intimate space in a same perimeter. Urban space and mobility
systems will also have to be questioned and adjusted in order to respond to a local resident population.
Furthermore, while abundant space and basic foundations already exist in the center, what must be done
for the city’s renewal? Firstly it is clear that short distances in the grid plan – 84 m per block – will imply a
certain density and secondly housing solutions must no longer be seen as individual structures on private
properties but as part of a system integrated into other functions.
| 34
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Plan of a suburban house in Otoya by Paul Ehrenberg, 1933
source: Arquitectura Urbana en Costa Rica, Carlos Altezor,
pp. 228-229.
35 |
Fig. 26
Front facade of apartment
building by J-F Salazar
source: Arquitectura Urbana
en Costa Rica, Carlos Altezor,
p. 221.
Fig. 25
Plan of apartment building by J-F Salazar, 1943
source: Arquitectura Urbana en Costa Rica, Carlos Altezor,
p. 222.
The “urbanización”
In Spanish, the urbanización refers to a usually low-dense residential neighborhood built outside an urban
nucleus. In Costa Rica, like in other Latin American nations, this type of urban pattern is often used as a solution to house low-income families because of its simplicity. While the traditional urban grid plan begins
with a central plaza and weaves all the streets and avenues together, the urbanización no longer ensures
a continuity of streets and avenues but fractures neighborhoods into residential communities characterized by one entrance and cul-de-sac streets. Outside San Jose’s grid system, housing solutions made into
urbanizaciones only seem to take into account the low value of a property and the function of creating
shelters but not their location. Many neighborhoods are therefore placed too far or isolated from mobility
services, which can result in social segregation and urban sprawl. Another issue with this type of urban
plan is its large consumption of space and lack of interaction with other activities.
Fig. 27
Typical “urbanización”
Fig. 28
Regular grid plan
| 36
5. MOBILITY
Automobile mobility
Automobile traffic currently represents 20% of people who enter the city and 70% of the total surface
consumed by motorized vehicles38. This quickly illustrates how much urban space is given to cars in a city
where almost all streets and avenues are currently one-way. When the grid plan was established in the
end of the 18th century no one ever imagined that San Jose would become such an important hub and
its streets congested with so much traffic. The little rural town that once developed narrow streets for ox
carts now receives 1.1 million people daily39. Its 84 m long blocks – which are rather short – have led the
streets to become one-way in order to allow a better flow of vehicles and less waiting time at intersections. However no major corridors run through San Jose, except Paseo Colon and 2nd Avenue, which flow
from west to east. The reason why 2nd Avenue marks an exception with other arteries is because it was
widened during most of the second half of the 20th century. One portion of 10th Avenue was also widened
to the west, but until this day only 2nd Avenue flows across the center as an open corridor.
But San Jose’s central position within the Greater Metropolitan Area also turns it into a cardinal point
through which many people circulate. In this sense all the vehicles that enter do not necessarily stay in the
city. This matter is problematic because it mixes mobility flows that actually come into the city with those
that only transit. In addition, if we observe that rail transportation is considerably insignificant, with only
70 frequencies a day through both main stations40, it means almost all mobility relies on roads. Congestion
is therefore an issue in San Jose’s streets and as mentioned earlier, automobiles take up 70% of the surface of motorized vehicles. Observations onsite confirmed that many cars contain only one person while
circulating downtown. Nevertheless, measures have been established against this saturation, for instance
an automobile restriction plan applies from Monday to Friday according to the last digits on license plates.
Major freight trucks are also forbidden inside the central core.
37 |
38. Marietta Espinoza M. “Caos Vial en San José es inevitable”. El Diario Extra, 15 Nov. 2007. Interview given to San Jose’s mayor Johnny Araya.
39. According to the interview given to Johnny Araya, 1.1 million people enter the city center each day. in “Caos Vial en San José es inevitable”. El Diario Extra.
40. Tren Urbano de Costa Rica website. www.trenurbano.co.cr
Fig. 29
Automobile mobility
| 38
Because San Jose’s rivers create natural barriers on the north and south, entrances to the center are punctual. There are 2 entrances from the west, 4 from the north, 3 from the east and 5 from the south, which
tallies a total of 14 main entrances to the central core. As for hierarchies in the system, there are a few
streets and avenues that form the main arteries through the city, some which are more or less continuous.
From east to west these are 1st and 8th Avenue, from west to east Paseo Colon, 2nd and 10th Avenue, from
north to south 10th Street and from south to north Central Street. Among these corridors, Paseo Colon and
2nd Avenue with 5 lanes are capable of handling big amounts of traffic, all others arteries basically consisting only of 2 lanes. The circulation map indicates these capacities with the amount of lanes and directions
for each street. It also supports the idea that the biggest vehicle densities are in the central core and at
the entrances, where most roads are entirely one-way, while many neighborhoods on the edges are still
two-way streets and therefore have less traffic flows.
Public transportation
Local transit bus
Public transportation in San Jose is almost entirely operated by buses, however there is no unitary system
or logic that offers an organized network with numbered routes and a public image. Instead itineraries are
operated under concession by companies, who run a centralized system, with independent bus routes
entering different parts of the city core then heading out towards their respective destinations in the
outskirts. Bus terminuses spread throughout the center of San Jose and no connection is offered between
them or other terminals. An exclusive connectivity within the four central districts is also non-existent.
39 |
As a matter of fact, the system is complicated to use for anyone who is not familiar with it. The lack of an
informative map or information makes it nearly impossible to locate the departure point of a route so itineraries as well as stops are unclear. Officially bus routes in Costa Rica are all numbered and their circuits
precisely outlined and issued by the government, however public bus companies choose to inform their
itineraries through vague destinations, such as “San Pedro”, which is more of an area in the agglomeration
than a precise location. In addition to this, the use of improvised landmarks serves as an orientation tool in
order to know where a bus passes or where it stops. Bus stops, which are also officially censused, may for
instance simply be referred to as “In front of the Parliament”. As mentioned previously, there is no central
terminal where buses end their routes. Some of the typical end-of-the-line stops consist of lined-up buses
on the right side of a street and the narrow sidewalk as a waiting platform for passengers.
Each route uses approximately the same type of vehicle, which is of standard length, and there are no
articulated or mini buses in use. This presents a problem when it comes to circulating in the central core,
especially with sharp 90˚ turns at intersections. As for exclusive circulation lanes, few streets are reserved
for bus traffic while private vehicles, delivery trucks, motorcycles and buses share the road throughout
the city’s arteries. Furthermore, according to recent reports public transportation is the first cause of pollution in the city. Current policies in the system have a direct impact on the quality of the air, as almost all
buses are powered by diesel41. Moreover, there have been attempts to implement changes, for instance
by introducing peripheral routes, but to this day all have failed.
From the observations made onsite, the lack of logic in the system and the important amount of space
consumed by buses in San Jose’s streets and avenues contributes to chaotic mobility. Some questions
arose during the visit, like why all bus routes end in the center and in different sectors? How does one connect from one route to another? Who uses these routes? What percentage does public transit represent
in San Jose’s overall mobility? Would more people use the system if it were organized differently?
41. Rodolfo Mora. “La contaminación que respiran los costarricenses no disminuye”. Noticias Repretel, 29 Oct. 2012.
| 40
The answers to these questions are obviously not all available, but it is clear that the current system is essential for commuting people in and out of the city. According to Johnny Araya, mayor of San Jose, more
than one million people enter the city each day and 80% do it by public transportation42. It makes one
wonder why the most important mobility system does not form a unitary network. Perhaps the current
system is the continuity of an old process that was established before the city expanded and transported
such an important amount of people. The concentric layout also makes it difficult to travel within the agglomeration if one’s destination is not exclusively the center. But despite this, the system is successfully
used by many people and shows the need for the city to keep on integrating public transportation into its
mobility flows.
Fig. 32
Fig. 33
Fig. 30
Turning bus
41 |
42. Marietta Espinoza M. “Caos Vial... Op. cit.
Fig. 31
Typical bus stop
Fig. 34
Main mobility arteries
| 42
National and regional bus system
Like in all centralized nations, one urban center represents the main hub for transportation and communication. In Costa Rica, San Jose is the point of departure
and final destination for almost all regional and national
bus routes. The characteristic of these bus lines is their
long distance service and more massive units in contrast with local urban buses. Since the railway lost its
place as a mean of transportation to the Atlantic and
Pacific coasts, mobility has developed on the road and
most of the national territory is rather well connected
to the capital. In San Jose different terminals spread
across the center with no relation between each other
as well as no strategic location with local public transit.
San Jose is a destination altogether, the precise area in
the city where terminals are located or how they are
connected to a local mobility network does not seem
to be important. As for information, the Costa Rican
Tourism Institute recently published a map showing San
Jose and its terminals as well as bus schedules, which is
the only available official source. The city’s position as
a national hub marks an important place for the tourism market but little coordination in the system makes
it difficult to use.
43 |
Fig. 35
Bus routes throughout
Costa Rica
Rail transport
Rail transport began in 1899 for coffee, banana, and sugar cane exportation from San Jose to the Atlantic
coast but quickly developed to the Pacific as well. It constituted part of the nation’s mobility during the
20th century until it was closed down in 1995. The railway tracks and stations within the Greater Metropolitan Area have nevertheless recently slowly been reintegrated. Since 2006 there is a metropolitan service
that runs through the center and has extended to neighborhoods on the east of San Jose as well as cities
like Heredia and Belen on the west. The train has successfully been accepted as an alternative to buses or
cars, however it is only available during rush hour in the mornings and evenings and lacks good connectivity with other mobility networks, such as the local bus system that enters the center of the city.
It is however impacting to notice a train line with such little use, while the streets are saturated with so
many buses and cars. According to Miguel Carabaguiaz, president of the Incofer43, 47% of traffic jams in
the western part of the city are caused by people coming from Alajuela, 64% in the northwest from Heredia and 57% in the east from Cartago44. These three major cities in the Greater Metropolitan Area are
strategically located on the railway line, as well as 9 other highly populated cantons. The railway perimeter
potentially concerns approximately 800’000 inhabitants, all 4 national universities, 6 other important university campuses, 6 hospitals, 3 stadiums, public institutions and several industrial zones.
The existent itinerary is thus strategic for San Jose’s regional mobility. The Atlantic station in the northeast
and the Pacific station in the south have been doors to the city in the past and could eventually be reintegrated into the city’s mobility corridors. The train has the advantage of not sharing the road with other
vehicles, except in some sensitive intersections and segments of its path between both main stations.
Furthermore, it is a mechanism that connects the region with the city center, where more than one million
people enter daily45.
43. Instituto costarricense de Ferrocarriles (Incofer), Costa Rican Railway Institute.
44. Jorge Sancho. “Tren interurbano, proyecto de $300 millones que mejorará la calidad de vida en el GAM”. La Prensa Libre, 7 May 2012.
45. Marietta Espinoza M. “Caos Vial... Op. cit.
| 44
The train’s reactivation is indeed already an important step, however much of the work is done with
limited funds. The railway sector in Costa Rica is still weak both for passengers and merchandise, but its
recent new services can be interpreted as urgent measures responding to the currently saturated mobility
network, both public and private. As for a long-term vision, for many years the government has expressed
its wish to modernize the metropolitan train by establishing an electric system and creating intermodal
nodes.
Fig. 36
Railroad network in
Costa Rica
45 |
Fig. 37
Railroad network in the
Greater Metropolitan Area
The tramway
The tramway is currently invisible in San Jose’s mobility network because it does not exist. Nevertheless,
the reason for mentioning it has to do with the past and the future. Although it was more of a cable car
than a massive transportation system, it served efficiently since 1899 for more than 50 years46 and linked
both railway stations with the Central Park and the east and west of the city. Nowadays the municipality
intends to build a new line in view of solving traffic problems. But would a new tramway line really solve –
or help solve – the issue? Many questions arise with the proposal. Is it really the best option of mobility?
Why not consider other methods or systems such as a subway? It is still unclear how the tramway would
interact with the rest of the network but according to public information47, it would be constructed on the
surface of the city’s only two wide arteries, Paseo Colon and 2nd Avenue. Furthermore, it is expected to
transport 150’000 passengers per day, which seems very meager when compared to the 1.1 million people
who enter daily.
Fig. 38
Former trolley on Central Avenue.
source: Al Mankoff
46. Carlos Altezor Fuentes. Op. cit., p. 18
47. “Posibilidad de que tranvía atraviese la capital podría ser realidad”. Noticias Repretel, 12 Nov. 2012.
| 46
Railway
Tramway
Fig. 39
Former tramway network
47 |
Pedestrian mobility
Sidewalks
Sidewalks ensure most pedestrian arteries throughout the city, but their flows vary from one sector to
another. According to onsite observations, most sidewalks present similar features in San Jose’s grid pattern. They are very narrow in width – in many cases 1 m – and often show signs of deterioration. Because
most blocks are densely occupied by constructed space and contain no porosity for pedestrians to walk
through them, sidewalks are often the only available area for people to gather and circulate. However,
their narrow width sometimes implies people must walk on the street where there are obstacles, crowds
or informal vendors who take over to sell merchandise. In areas where sidewalks are wider it is common
for cars to take the space over as parking. Pedestrian paths in Costa Rica are often disregarded or in some
places simply do not exist. Inefficient sidewalks can cause a danger to foot travelers, who represent a considerable part of the city’s mobility.
So then why are sidewalks important for the city? First of all pedestrian mobility is closely related to public
transportation, which brings in 80% of the people daily. This means once in the city center, most people
get around on foot. Secondly, the city grid was initially developed for ox carts and its short distances – each
block is 84 m long – makes it difficult for motorized traffic to circulate but strategic for pedestrian activity.
Important pedestrian mobility mostly concentrates near dynamic arteries like Central, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th
Avenues between 20th street on the west and 11th street on the east.
| 48
Pedestrian boulevards
During the 1970s some blocks on Central Avenue were suddenly closed to traffic and converted exclusively
into pedestrian arteries, but it was only in 1994 that they were cobblestoned and equipped with street
furniture. Nowadays these pedestrian streets, known as boulevards, run through more areas in the central
core, like 4th Avenue, 9th and 17th Streets. Cobblestone, trees and the absence of motorized vehicles are
the most visible physical features, but a generous walking space and heavy pedestrian flows are what truly
make these boulevards unique in the city center.
But what makes them interesting? The experience with Central Avenue demonstrated a big difference
in people’s interactions before and after the street was closed to traffic. Unlike sidewalks, which are narrow, a boulevard is more than only a space for circulating. It allows people to gather and eliminates the
danger of sharing the road with motorcycles, cars and buses, which can often be tense and stressful. In
several areas pedestrian boulevards have also benefited the city’s liveliness by stimulating an existing mix
of activities as well as connecting strategic points in the city, not only of commercial character but also
institutional, cultural and touristic48. The users of boulevards are mostly people from outside the city core,
who fill the main pedestrian corridors located on the city’s central axis or near it (Central and 4th Avenues).
Both extremities of this axis are major entrances to the city – Paseo Colon on the west, Cuesta Moras
on the east – and they intersect with the most important mobility flows entering from the north and
the south. There are however, some examples that are not as dynamic, for instance 17th Street, which is
predominantly surrounded by institutional and cultural buildings and shows less intensity as a pedestrian
artery. Therefore, the variety of activities in short distances, combined with strategic mobility routes help
generate important pedestrian flows in San Jose.
49 |
48. Daniel Morgan Ball. Los Usuarios del Espacio Público como Protagonistas en el Paisaje Urbano. Revista de Arquitectura, Vol. 8, Num. 1, Universidad
Catolica de Colombia, 2006, p. 38.
Fig. 40
Central Avenue
source: Esteban Coto
Fig. 41
2nd Street
Fig. 42
4th Avenue
Fig. 43
17th Street
| 50
6. URBAN SPACE
Streets and avenues
Streets and avenues are part of San Jose’s continuous public space. While blocks are “solid” and not penetrable for public transition, streets on the other hand are fluid spaces. Nowadays this space functions
differently according to its location and its characteristics. For instance, the narrowest streets are near the
original center and handle the biggest mobility flows. They combine 1 m wide sidewalks on each side and
two lanes of motorized traffic in the middle. In newer neighborhoods like Amon or Escalante, the distance
from facade to facade is wider49. Because these neighborhoods were developed in the end of the 19th
century as entirely new urban extensions instead of a continuous process in time, their scale was modified
and new elements introduced. For instance, trees often line-up between the street and the sidewalk in the
northeast. In other neighborhoods sidewalks are separated from the road with strips of grass, a common
element in suburbs in the United States. Few exceptions of wide arteries however extend through the city,
Second Avenue and Paseo Colon being the only examples that break the scale. In the case of 2nd Avenue,
motorized vehicles use most of the surface – 5 lanes –, while sidewalks are approximately less than 2 m
wide. The proportion of space between vehicles and pedestrians is uneven, which means that people on
foot often have to suffer the lack of efficient infrastructure that could avoid congesting the city’s streets.
Pedestrian boulevards otherwise use space in a different way, though they are part of the narrow central
streets. Sensations can totally change through the character of a place, for instance pedestrians are given
the chance to feel a spacious environment and interact between each other in a boulevard or a plaza,
whereas narrow sidewalks juxtaposed with buses and cars tend to create a feeling of claustrophobia and
insecurity.
51 |
49. ”The new regulation established the width of the streets at 20 m. The justification for the change was that the width established in the old Reglamento
de Policía (16 varas equivalent to 13 m) was not enough for transition and air circulation and earthquake risks and was harmful to the ornamentation of the
cities”, in Florencia Quesada Avendaño. La Modernización entre cafetales... Op. cit., p. 86.
But one of the major urban transformations that changed the traditional urban pattern was the creation of
paseos or boulevards. This was key to modern urbanism in Latin America during the mid-19th century because it contrasted with original colonial nucleuses50. These interventions of modernization were also part
of public hygiene policies applied through the creation of parks and influenced by Hausmann’s plans for
Paris. In the end of the 19th century, while 3rd Avenue in the northeast became the city’s main entrance for
those who arrived by train to the Atlantic station, Paseo Colon took that position by the time they began to
arrive by airplane in the 1930s51. At that time Costa Rica’s first international airport began operations in La
Sabana, now a Metropolitan Park located at the western end of Paseo Colon. Although the second avenue
is wider than the first, both have the characteristic of a line of trees on both sides.
Fig. 44
2nd Avenue
Fig. 45
Central Avenue
Fig. 46
Escalante neighborhood
Fig. 47
Typical Street
51. Florencia Quesada Avendaño. Planning... Op. cit., p.264.
| 52
53 |
Fig. 48
Paseo Colon Avenue
source: Panoramio.com by Luis Palma
Fig. 49
2nd Avenue
source: nacion.com by Juliana Barquero
Fig. 50
1st Avenue, by the Central Market
source: Flickr.com by “seaview99”
Fig. 51
3rd Avenue
source: territorioscuola.com
Fig. 52
16th Street by the Coca Cola terminal
Fig. 53
21st Street in Aranjuez
Fig. 54
34th Street, northwest of core
Fig. 55
5th Avenue in Escalante
Fig. 56
22nd Street in San Bosco
Block typologies
In the city, blocks are the result of the grid’s composition and spatially the opposite of streets and avenues.
As mentioned in the second chapter, Spanish colonies outlined square blocks to structure urban patterns
often for military purposes. In Latin America they are known as manzanas, referring to the surface that
they form (1 manzana = 10’000 var2 or 7’056 m2). In San Jose only some are public and allow pedestrian
transition, like parks or plazas, while most consist of private or institutional property. The geometry of the
grid plan additionally establishes a strong barrier between the inside (private) and the outside (public).
Furthermore, blocks can be categorized into different typologies: single-plot, multi-plot, plazas, parks,
semi-plazas, semi-parks or fully constructed, partially constructed, high-rise or low-rise. These squares
are divided into properties with different sizes and shapes, which is interesting because the checkerboard
plan guarantees certain geometry. The irregularity of internal division in the original blocks is most likely a
result of plot division during the establishment of grid plan. Moreover, the contemporary physical feature
in buildings is part of an evolutionary process of modification, demolition and replacement, which has led
to contiguous constructions and surface consumption of the entire main facade. This contiguity, generated
by narrow plots, excludes the possibility for any lateral door or window. This has however been regulated
and therefore a rule forbids any type of direct opening with a neighboring property. Nevertheless the different heights of contiguous structures create a dissonance between buildings and consequently often
cause the blind facade effect. In places where short and tall buildings coexist, there may be a perception
of reduced space, creating the discomforting impression of a big wall. In summary, only few blocks are
entirely thought as one system, while most are an addition of individual structures that border each other.
Fig. 57
Contiguous buildings
| 54
Fig. 58
Parks and plazas
55 |
Fig. 59
Parks and plazas in detail
| 56
Public space
Public space in the city core is not abundant, however the origin of the grid plan – the central plaza – gives
it a cardinal position. Influenced by Hausmann’s interventions during the 19th century, San Jose also experienced urban sanitation and public hygiene policies. Parks and plazas were no longer exclusively marketplaces, but open areas for air circulation and purification. Initially public space and mercantile activities
were both mixed in the central plaza, but when the marketplace was constructed three blocks away the
plaza became an exclusive “green space”. During the second half of the 19th century the State promoted
the creation of parks and by the end of the century all green spaces were defined in the existing city52. But
through the 20th century the growth of San Jose’s agglomeration meant more people were entering the
city on a daily basis. However the lack of open spaces, the stiffness of its sealed blocks and the narrow
streets led the city to plan new plazas. By the end of the 20th century Plaza de la Cultura (1983), Plaza de
la Democracia (1989) and Plaza de las Garantias Sociales (1994) had been created. The first and the third,
currently related to the main pedestrian boulevards on Central and 4th Avenue, are important connectivity nodes and have become central landmarks in the city. But the success of pedestrian streets in densely
active areas has also reached other smaller spaces like Plaza Juan Rafael Mora Porras next to the Central
Post Office building and Plaza Juan Mora Fernandez, opposite the National Theater. On the other had,
Plaza de la Democracia presents little activity although it is located one block away from a busy sector53
and between Central and 2nd Avenue. The lack of synergy and connectivity with other active areas, as well
as a slight inclination of the ground, are perhaps the reason why this plaza is usually deserted.
57 |
53. Daniel Morgan Ball, Op. cit., p. 37.
Residual space
Abandoned space
One of the signs of San Jose’s decreasing population is its abandoned space, which in many cases consists
of empty lots where old and deteriorated houses have collapsed. Abandoned lots are therefore common and abundant in the central core, although sometimes their original front facade maintains standing.
However it seems like a paradox to have so much vacant space in the center of San Jose. Why expand the
agglomeration outwards when there is so much available and valuable non-used land near one of the nation’s most dynamic areas? Onsite observations confirmed this phenomenon, although no figures were
found to support it. But if diurnal activities bring people into the city, why does no one want to live in the
central core? Much of the abandoned state affects the image of the city in a negative way. However the
consequence of this problem is not only aesthetic it is also related to insecurity. Empty lots and abandoned
built structures, some which are interesting and valuable architectural icons, attract drug addicts and other marginal people. Many of these spaces are plots with wild high grass or are accumulated with garbage.
This problem, which affects some places more than others, has established an unsafe environment and
discouraged people from wanting to live in the center.
Deteriorated buildings
Empty lots are not the only reason for the city’s abandoned and dirty image, many vacant structures,
whether shops, offices or houses, show deterioration. In order to make it easier to distinguish, buildings
can be divided in two categories: valuable and non-valuable. The criteria for the first group consists mostly
in historical value brought to the city, which usually contains an architectural language. Valuable constructions can vary in shape, size, function, architectural language and many other elements. For instance,
some of the wooden working-class houses from the first half of the 20th century in southern or western
neighborhoods could be considered of interest for the city even though they do not stand out like bigger
| 58
buildings. Many buildings from the 19th and beginning of the 20th century have however been renovated in
the past years. Botica La Solera, an Art Deco building from the 1930s is an example of an abandoned structure that was recently restored. On the other hand, non-valuable constructions are usually vernacular or
impractical buildings that contain no heritage and could be replaced. Many were built by engineers during
the second half of the 20th century and demonstrate little or no architectural quality.
Fig. 60
Deteriorated
building
source:
Esteban Coto
Fig. 61
Empty property
source:
Esteban Coto
Fig. 62
Deteriorated
building
source:
Esteban Coto
Fig. 63
Typical parking lot
source:
Esteban Coto
Parking space
The issues of mobility and space are closely related and while much automobile traffic crosses the city,
vehicles that stay in the center need a place to park. But San Jose’s pattern was not originally developed
for such dense traffic and the increase in cars during the past decades has boosted the demand for parking
space. This mobility issue has therefore had an impact on the evolution of the city and its private space.
Parking lots throughout the heart of San Jose began flourishing after the 1960s and consist mostly in privately owned plots converted into paved surfaces and sometimes covered.
59 |
Fig. 64
Parking space
| 60
Much of the space is obtained from demolished old houses, cinemas or abandoned lots but has also been
taken from influential buildings such as the original National Library, a neo-classical structure demolished
in the 1970s in order to host a parking lot. The lack of an efficient mobility system and poor public parking
policies has generated this new programmatic tendency of occupying urban space with independent parking lots throughout the grid in an almost improvised way. In this sense, the city does not provide any mass
solution, for instance underground or tower garages, nor alternatives to leave vehicles outside the city
and enter by public transportation. An exception has however recently appeared with the construction of
a parking tower near the Pacific station by a private hospital, which consists in a multi-level structure for
1’100 cars.
A parking lot census illustrated by a map helps visualize the amount of “carved” space in the city’s pattern.
It is interesting to point out that both major arteries, Central Avenue for pedestrians and 2nd Avenue for
vehicles, are almost not affected by this problem, while surrounding blocks on the north and the south,
as well as the west, are invaded with parking space. The strip around Central and 2nd Avenue is characterized with important pedestrian flows and densely integrates activities, making it one of the most attractive centralities in the nation. However its peripheral blocks radically break off from this dynamic pattern
and present signs of deterioration as well as abandoned empty sites. But although much physical space is
used for parking, people’s demand largely exceeds supply. So if it is a constraint, why do people continue
to come into the city by car? It may eventually be by choice, however we have seen the difficulty in using
public transportation alternatives in the mobility chapter. We can therefore question the way one enters
the city as well as the efficiency of mobility and its influence on the occupation of space. For instance, if
San Jose had a mass transit system that could encourage people to enter the center without their car, we
could consider less need for parking lots and therefore more available land for building. Furthermore,
one of the problems with parking lots in the city is that they do not integrate with dynamic functions and
therefore create “passive” spaces, especially when they exclusively cover ground surface. This can be
harmful to the liveliness of a neighborhood as it can fracture the contiguity of its activities.
61 |
Site surveys
Six perimeters were selected and surveyed within the grid as strategic locations, either as destination
points like the market and theater areas or entrances to the city. Some of these sites currently present
a successful mix of daily activities, however all have in common a lack of housing. It is possible that the
reinforcement of perimeters like these, through architectural interventions among other measures, may
have an influence on neighboring areas and trigger new development in San Jose’s central core in the longterm. However, any intervention would only be a contribution to the solution of regenerating an area.
Fig. 65
Selected perimeters
| 62
Coca Cola
Located on the western edge of the central nucleus, the area
consists in one of the most important bus terminals, which
makes it a busy entrance to the city from Paseo Colon and a
predominantly commercial sector. The 1-level covered market
of the Coca Cola terminal marks the heart of the neighborhood along with Plaza Rofas, a 7-level multi-function building between the market and Paseo Colon Avenue. The site is
only one block away from the pedestrian boulevard on Central Avenue and adjacent to a public school and a fire station.
Moreover, car and bus parking lots occupy approximately 42%
of the total surface on the blocks. Nevertheless, although the
area ensures a dynamic mix of institutional, office and commercial activities, it suffers from a bad reputation of insecurity
and some people rather avoid the neighborhood. Many elements therefore make it a key area for potential development,
for instance its liveliness as well as the proximity to Central
Avenue (the most dynamic street in the city), important mobility flows and much available building space. However the
complex issue with insecurity must be addressed in order to
create a livable climate in this particular site where housing is
practically inexistent. Finally, it is uncertain that the Coca Cola
terminal will forever remain a busy entry point, although no
current plans consider relocating the station, reshaping the
public transportation system or activating the railroad to the
extent of replacing national bus lines.
63 |
Fig. 66
Coca Cola
1. Bus terminal and depot
2. Coca Cola marketplace
3. Hotel
4. Plaza Rofas
Central Market
Fig. 67
Central Market
1. Central Market
2. Raventós building
3. Banco de Costa Rica
4. Banco Nacional
5. Central Bank
6. Central Post Office
The density and multiplicity of activities makes this site one of
the most centric and dynamic in the city. Important pedestrian
flows articulate ten blocks with walking streets, connecting
the Central Market, the Central Post Office, banks and many
shops. The exclusivity of pedestrian mobility combined with
little open plazas, benches and trees also creates conditions
for gathering. It is the site of San Jose’s first hermitage, which
marked the city’s foundation in the 18th century, as well as the
former tobacco factory (1782), the National Palace (1850) and
the Artillery plaza (1870) until they were replaced by the Central Bank in 1959. Both major national banks have their headquarters in the perimeter and commercial activities as well
as offices occupy most of the space in the buildings. The area
also represents an important transition corridor for private
and public vehicles with 1st and 2nd Avenue as main arteries,
as well as bus stops along 2nd and 3rd Avenue, which contributes to important pedestrian flows. The densely built sector
can be observed through the height of buildings, which are
between 4 and 10 stories tall (plus the 21-level National Bank
tower) and contrast with much of San Jose’s low-rise skyline.
Although dense in constructions, some blocks consist in deteriorated and abandoned structures and therefore could be
used differently.
| 64
National Theater
Many landmarks and activities that attract people to the city
center are located in this sector. Pedestrian boulevard networks, juxtaposed with public plazas, structure this dynamic
area, where built surfaces mainly consist of commercial, office
and cultural space. The outstanding public spaces are Plaza de
la Cultura, the city’s most important gathering place, Garantias Sociales plaza, a notable destination for public buses and
the little plaza of La Soledad, located at the crossroad of two
pedestrian boulevards. Furthermore, many public bus routes
arrive on the eastern end of Central Avenue from the east, as
well as from the west and south on 2nd and 6th Avenue. Public
buildings that occupy entire blocks, such as the Social Security
Headquarters and the Girl’s School are distinguishable among
the contiguity of different structures that form ordinary blocks.
Parking space however occupies the only few vacant properties, especially on 2nd Avenue. As for housing, there are some
apartments on the upper levels of some buildings, however
difficult to identify from the street. The interesting feature in
this perimeter is the density and variety of activities, as well as
its position as one of the major centralities in the nation.
65 |
Fig. 68
National Theater
1. Plaza de la Cultura
2. National Theater
3. Girl’s school
4. Social Security headquarters
5. Garantías Sociales plaza
6. La Soledad plaza
7. La Soledad church
Atlantic
Fig. 69
Atlantic
1. National Library
2. National Park
3. Costa Rican parliament
4. Atlantic railway station
During the end of the 19th and first half of the 20th centuries,
this sector was the main entrance to the city from the Atlantic
railway station. Nowadays the area is characterized by official
buildings and much residual space among other ordinary structures. Aside from the railway station, the Costa Rican Congress
and the National Library are the most notable buildings, while
other official buildings just outside the limit of the perimeter
are not considered in the survey. The National Park, between
the Parliament and the National Library offers the equivalent
of two contiguous blocks of open space with lawn, trees and
benches. However, the railway connection and the proximity
to the city’s central nucleus are what make this sector interesting for development. Many plots are either occupied by parking lots, deteriorated properties or obsolete structures that
could host new activities, for instance housing. Its strategic position, between the center and the entrance from the east and
the northeast also makes it an entry point.
| 66
Pacific
Although this neighborhood does not currently figure among
the dynamic sectors in the central core, it is strategically located near the Pacific train station, which means there is a
possibility for it to someday become a door to the city if the
railroad undergoes major reactivation. In this sense, the actual
railway line connects a site outside the Greater Metropolitan
Area, which is likely to become the main international airport
for the region in 2025. But the existing infrastructure is not the
only interesting condition in the area. Indeed, there is good
connectivity with the nucleus as all northbound streets intersect with the city’s central axis on 4th, 2nd and Central Avenue.
The distance between the station and Central Park is a 750
m straight line and consists in much residual and abandoned
space. Moreover, Central Street connects the center with Desamparados and Alajuelita, two highly populated cantons in
the southern part of the agglomeration. As for public space,
an open plaza opposite the station offers the only non-built
accessible surface in the neighborhood. Otherwise, most
blocks are ordinary low-rise structures with small industries
and offices, with the exception of the Clinica Biblica, one of
the most important private hospitals in the city, which consists
in a 9-level building. Nevertheless, because the area is undeveloped at the moment, an architectural intervention would
only be a contribution to a long-term bigger project that would
need to address mobility issues among others.
67 |
Fig. 70
Pacific
1. Cañas park
2. Pacific railway station
3. Clinica Biblica hospital
Gonzalez Viquez
Fig. 71
Gonzalez Viquez
1. Boy’s school
2. National geographical institution
3. Plaza Viquez park
4. Metropolitan train stop
5. Football field
6. Swimming pool
Plaza Viquez is more of an entry point than a centrality within
the central core, however the reason for considering it in the
survey is because it represents a distinctive configuration in
the urban pattern. Indeed, the area is characterized by the
plaza, which is actually a big rectangular public block integrated into the grid system. Although only the northwestern end
is an accessible park, the remaining space is composed of a
school and sports facilities, such as a swimming pool, a basketball court and a football field. The plaza marks the curve
where the railroad turns at a 90˚ angle and currently serves
as a local station for the metropolitan train. The blocks on the
west of the plaza are composed of public buildings, while the
northern portion is occupied by little shops, restaurants, garages, parking lots, a car wash facility, a gas station and empty
lots. The perimeter is strategic because of its location between
the main centralities and the major arteries that connect the
south and southeast of the agglomeration.
| 68
7. URBAN REGENERATION
“San José Posible” plan
San Jose Posible, in Spanish, started in the beginning of the 21st century as an initiative by the Institute of
Tropical Architecture led by Bruno Stagno, in view of bringing answers to the issue of regeneration and
repopulation. It has gained support from the government and consists in a big-scaled plan for the center
of San Jose that promotes interventions in order to make the city more attractive to people. It originally
focused on 53 central blocks, considered by the architects as the most influential but decadent in the city,
and wished to establish a setting for housing investment in order to achieve repopulation54. Nowadays
the plan is used as a reference every time a residential project or urban intervention takes place in San
Jose’s 4 central districts. However according to Jimena Ugarte, San Jose Posible is at a standstill: “we had
several meetings with the commission of regeneration and repopulation of the city of San Jose but nothing
happened”55, she states.
Municipality’s position on regeneration and repopulation
The Municipality of San Jose has been promoting urban regeneration in the past decade through the
construction of pedestrian boulevards, underground electrification, renovation of parks and plazas and
visibility regulations on publicity among other measures. Nevertheless the city is also aware of its shrinking population in the center and therefore wishes to promote projects that will bring residents back to
the area. According to the municipality’s plan on regeneration and repopulation, it encourages vertical
growth for buildings with a mix of commercial and residential activities. The idea also specifically plans on
targeting young professionals who can pay a mortgage, which is only one portion of the population. Furthermore, the city explicitly states that the development of these projects depends on the private sector’s
vision. It is however troubling to think that regeneration may largely be in the hands of private investors
who seek economic profit as a priority.
69 |
54. Bruno Stagno, et al. “San Jose Posible”. Instituto de Arquitectura Tropical, San Jose, Costa Rica.
55. Interview with architect Jimena Ugarte, initiator of San Jose Posible, San Jose, Costa Rica, 17 Aug. 2012.
Their position in the frontline and the municipality’s faith in them will certainly encourage big housing
projects throughout the center but what will be the outcome? The city currently exonerates 99% of construction taxes for all vertical projects within the 4 central districts in view of increasing density56. But will
the construction of high-rise residential towers be enough to solve the problem? While the issue of needing to bring people back to the city is clear, there seems to be a lack of global vision for strategic development tied to essential topics like mobility and spatial issues. Can the city guarantee urban quality without
being at the mercy of private investors? It is important that both private companies and the municipality
work with a common vision in order to shape the city and fulfill its needs.
Extract of San Jose’s municipality’s plan for regeneration and repopulation57:
(…)
The initiative does not consider the purchase of land on behalf of the Municipality of San Jose.
The development and repopulation depends to a big extent on the private sector’s vision and its distinctive partakers: landowners, investors, developers and final clients.
There is no intention within the plans of the city council of developing social housing projects for the capital.
The target audiences for the proposal are professionals with medium incomes who can obtain a mortgage loan in
order to finance their housing solution in high-rise buildings, within the developments that the private sector creates.
(…)
The implementation of the urban renewal initiative depends on the conditions that the municipality and other
public institutions can generate, however the development of housing projects cannot be managed by the public
sector and therefore means the private sector’s role is consequently crucial.
56. Alberto Barrantes. “Torres de condominios cambian San Jose con la vida en altura”. La Nacion, 9 Dec. 2012.
57. Municipalidad de San José. “Explicación sobre el plan de regeneración y repoblamiento de San José”. pp. 4-5.
| 70
Contemporary housing projects in San Jose’s central core
Although many high-rise housing towers have been completed in recent years west of San Jose’s central
core, only two major projects have been constructed in the center: Paseo Colon Towers and 6-30 Towers.
Both are located in the western side of the core and are the first residential high-rise buildings of their
kind within the perimeter of the 4 central districts. Interestingly, both names refer to their location in the
grid, Paseo Colon Towers on the avenue with the same name and 6-30 Towers on the block intersecting
6th Avenue with 30th Street. The municipality, who encourages vertical housing solutions, has enthusiastically applauded these projects and considers them part of the repopulation plan. Nevertheless these
condominiums remain inaccessible to the majority of the population, which makes one question the type
of urban regeneration that the city plans to achieve. Both cases present similar luxury features like outdoor swimming pools and tennis courts, private gyms and interior parking space. Considering that space
is scarce in a block, it is surprising that investors still offer typical suburban facilities, for instance a tennis court on ground level. But the novelty with this type of housing is that it allows living downtown and
in a secure environment at the same time, which is one of the developer’s strongest arguments. But do
these projects really participate in regenerating the city by integrating with nearby activities or are they
closed and protected spaces like gated communities? This also leads to questioning the way space must
be transformed in the city grid. Should every block remain impenetrable and mark a rigid border between
public and private space or can that limit be softened? Furthermore, are there strategic locations in the
city where housing should be developed and is there an important demand of people wanting to live
downtown? Although official numbers were not available, the desire to live in the city is reflected through
the success both projects have received. In the case of Paseo Colon Towers, which began its construction
in 2010, all floors have been sold58. The success has led developers of both projects to each build a second
tower. Finally, if the municipality expects housing to be developed by the private sector, do companies
consider it only profitable to build luxurious projects or can other social classes benefit from San Jose’s
repopulation?
71 |
58. Alberto Barrantes. “Edificio más alto de Costa Rica tiene todos sus pisos vendidos”. La Nacion, 7 Dec. 2012.
Fig. 72
6-30 Towers
source: revistasucasa.com
Fig. 74
Location of major housing projects
Fig. 73
Paseo Colon Towers
source: arquitectoures.blogspot.com
by Gilberto Lopez Rodriguez
| 72
CONCLUSION
While San Jose began as a humble settlement and developed into an important metropolis, the central
core gained a bad reputation of being unsafe, dirty, crowded and abandoned during the past four decades.
As a consequence it became unattractive for people to live in and mobility issues sprung with a collapsed
road network and inefficient public transportation. But as the suburbs keep on sprawling through the
Central Valley, many buildings and properties remain abandoned in the center. Furthermore, we observed
that this area contains dynamic sectors with activities that attract more than a million people during the
day. The existing urban pattern as well as many elements such as available physical space, an underused
railway system, hospitals, theaters, cultural centers and many other activities makes this an interesting
place of intervention. The municipality has understood the need of regenerating the city and although its
intentions go in this direction, there is no clear and long-term plan of how to proceed. Indeed, allowing the
private sector to shape the center could be a dangerous step, taking into account that private projects often develop in an individual matter without considering public accessibility or synergies with surrounding
properties. This questions the relationship between private and public space and how a project can truly
contribute to the city’s regeneration. Therefore recovering San Jose is not only the act of repopulating it
with high-rise condominiums, but taking into account spaces that will be shared by the population, the
way people move around and the interaction of activities.
Nevertheless, many issues must be solved in order to make San Jose more livable, for instance restructuring mobility and decreasing the amount of cars and buses by implementing transportation alternatives or
reducing traffic that exclusively transits through the center. This could allow an increase of street space for
pedestrian mobility and create local corridors within the central core. Implementing a new transportation
network could also integrate the existing railroad with inner mobility systems as an organized network. Finally, these changes are some essential steps that could set the condition for repopulating and stimulating the central core. Perhaps not all areas will develop similarly, but some neighborhoods could generate
development as local centralities within the center.
73 |
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Alonso Pereira, José Ramón. Introducción a la historia de la arquitectura: de los orígenes al siglo XXI,
Barcelona: Editorial Reverté, 2005.
Altezor Fuentes, Carlos. Arquitectura urbana en Costa Rica: exploración histórica 1900-1950,
Cartago: Editorial Tecnológica de Costa Rica, 1986.
Cardarelli, François. Encyclopedia of Scientific Units, Weights and Measures: Their SI Equivalences and Origins, Rochdale, England: Springer, 2003.
Chant, Colin and Goodman, David C. Pre-Industrial: Cities and Technology, London: Routledge, 1999.
Gaimster, David and Majewski, Teresita. International Handbook of Historical Archeology, New York:
Springer, 2009.
Gonzalez Viquez, Cleto. Apuntes estadísticos sobre la ciudad de San Jose, San Jose: Imprenta de Avelino
Alsina, 1905.
Koolhaas, Rem. New York Délire (Delirious New York), Marseille: Editions Parenthèses, 2002.
Marley, David F. Historic Cities of the Americas: An illustrated Encyclopedia, Volume 1,
Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2005.
Reps, John W. The making of Urban America: A History of City Planning in the United States, Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1992.
| 74
Sanou, Ofelia, et al. Costa Rica: An Architectural and Landscape guide,
San Jose and Sevilla: Junta de Andalucía, 2010.
Quesada Avendaño, Florencia. En el barrio Amón, San Jose: Universidad de Costa Rica, 2004.
_________. La Modernización entre cafetales: San José, Costa Rica, 1880-1930, Doctoral Thesis, Helsinki:
Renvall Institute, 2007.
_________, et al. Planning Latin America’s capital cities, 1850-1950, London: Routledge, 2002.
Reviews and articles
Barrantes, Alberto. “Edificio más alto de Costa Rica tiene todos sus pisos vendidos”. La Nacion, 7 Dec. 2012.
_________. “Torres de condominios cambian San Jose con la vida en altura”. La Nacion, 9 Dec. 2012.
Espinoza M., Marietta. “Caos Vial en San José es inevitable”. El Diario Extra, 15 Nov. 2007.
Morgan Ball, Daniel. “Los Usuarios del Espacio Público como Protagonistas en el Paisaje Urbano”, Revista
de Arquitectura, Vol. 8, Num. 1, 2006, Universidad Catolica de Colombia: p. 38.
Mora, Rodolfo. “La contaminación que respiran los costarricenses no disminuye”. Noticias Repretel, 29
Oct. 2012.
Sancho, Jorge. “Tren interurbano, proyecto de $300 millones que mejorará la calidad de vida en el GAM”.
La Prensa Libre, 7 May 2012.
75 |
Unknown author. “Posibilidad de que tranvía atraviese la capital podría ser realidad”. Noticias Repretel, 12
Nov. 2012.
Internet and pdf documents
Brenes, Eduardo, et al. “Informe de la comisión de regeneración urbana y repoblamiento de San José”.
2004. < http://www.scribd.com/doc/94700797/38/CONCLUSIONES>
_________. “La GAM: tendencias y propuestas, algunos datos y ubicación de la GAM” PRUGAM. 2002.
<http://www.unfpa.or.cr/dmdocuments/PRUGAM.pdf>
Stagno, Bruno, et al. “San Jose Posible”, Instituto de Arquitectura Tropical, San Jose, Costa Rica.
< http://www.arquitecturatropical.org/EDITORIAL/documents/SAN%20JOSE%20POSIBLE.pdf>
Municipalidad de San Jose. “Explicación sobre el plan de regeneración y repoblamiento de San José”.
< https://www.msj.go.cr/SiteAssets/conozca_su_ciudad/expli_plan_regen_repob_sanjose.pdf>
www.msj.go.cr
www.trenurbano.co.cr
www.tramz.com/cr/cr.html
www.panoramio.com
www.revistasucasa.com
| 76

san jose, a city to recover_ec

Transcription

Similar documents

Weather Series Learning Resource Guide

MapSearch Engine

skylinesanjose.com 1375 Lick Avenue, San Jose, CA 95110

Parish Office: 408 293 3503 MASS SCHEDULE – HORARIO de

Jardin de ninos Rosalinda Guerrero Gambo Ejido Jose Delgado

Janet Morris Musson

2015 Award Winning Projects - Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff

kungfumagazine . com - The Tiger Claw Foundation

Saturday institute on social-emotional learning

30th - San Jose State University